Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T11:19:04.806Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Imitation and recall of optionally deletable sentences by young children*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Thomas J. Thieman
Thomas J. Thieman
Affiliation:
Psychology Department, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A set of sentences written in either an expanded or optionally deleted form were read for imitation and delayed recall to a group of nursery school children. A similar set of sentences had been presented for recall to adults. The older children and adults tended to recall the sentences in deleted forms, regardless of their input form. The youngest child tested, however, recalled the sentences in a fully expanded form, even when they had been presented and imitated in deleted form. The results offer support for the hypothesis of memory for non-linguistic ideas by both children and adults, as well as a demonstration of Slobin's (1973) universal operating principle that when children are first gaining control of an optionally deletable linguistic entity, they will often produce only its full form.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , November 1975 , pp. 261 - 269
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1975

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Binet, A. & Henri, V. (1894). La mémoire des phrases (mémoire des idées). L'Année Psychologique I. 24–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bock, J. K. & Brewer, W. F. (1974). Reconstructive recall in sentences with alternative surface structures. JExpPsych 103. 837–43.Google Scholar
Fraser, C., Bellugi, U. & Brown, R. (1963). Control of grammar in imitation, comprehension, and production. JVLVB 2. 121–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freedle, R. O., Keeney, T. J. & Smith, N. D. (1970). Effects of mean depth and grammaticality on children's imitation of sentences. JVLVB 9. 149–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nurss, J. R. & Day, D. E. (1971). Imitation, comprehension, and production of grammatical structures. JVLVB 10. 68–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slobin, D. I. (1973). Cognitive prerequisites for the development of grammar. In Ferguson, C. A. & Slob, D. I. in (eds), Studies of child language development. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I. & Welsh, C. A. (1971). Elicited imitation as a research tool in developmental psycholinguistics. In Lauatelli, C. S. (ed.), Language training in early childhood education. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar